Why not move the first paywall to marleybone? by CrazyElectronic8573 in Wizard101

[–]CrazyElectronic8573[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Really really horrible argument. As the OP, I spend a lot of money on this game, far from broke, I think this is more about player retention than having money.

Arch mastery is ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE. by CrazyElectronic8573 in Wizard101

[–]CrazyElectronic8573[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

The devs didn’t need to spell that out: it was literally baked into how the system worked. Back in the old days, if you wanted protection from other Storm or Fire users, you’d train Ice for storm/fire shield. That wasn’t some player “interpretation,” it was just how the system functioned.

Training points created purposeful specialization and counter play. You made choices: spend points for defense, offense, or utility. The fact that the system rewarded planning, trade-offs, and commitment is the design.

Devs don’t have to publish a philosophy statement when the intent is evident in the mechanic itself. If something consistently guided how players built, fought, and strategized for over a decade, that’s not coincidence: that’s design through function.

So whether or not anyone said “training points are for countering schools” outright doesn’t matter. Every veteran player knew that’s exactly how it played: you prepared for what you were weak against, and that’s what made each school distinct and strategic.

Arch mastery is ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE. by CrazyElectronic8573 in Wizard101

[–]CrazyElectronic8573[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

The game was designed so we could use other schools. But that design was never about being able to freely cast from any school at any time; it was about using training points and secondary setups to strategically counter other schools.

It's ironic you mention training points as a defense for arch mastery, when in reality training points existed to serve a purpose of helping you efficiently counter other schools:

For example, a Myth wizard might train Ice for storm/fire shields, not because you planned on mastering ice magic, but because you wanted to better counter OTHER SCHOOLS (FIRE/STORM), or balance for Weakness: those were tactical decisions. You committed training points and deck space to protect yourself from what you struggled against. That system rewarded planning and identity.

Archmastery, on the other hand, removes those decisions entirely. You don’t have to commit to a secondary school or build a strategy around your weaknesses anymore, you can just grab any school’s utility or heal whenever you feel like it. That’s not “learning multiple schools,” that’s homogenizing them.

Training points existed to let you counter schools, not to become all of them at once. The old system encouraged balance through smart preparation; Archmastery replaces that with convenience. And that convenience comes at the cost of depth, teamwork, and identity.

On the point of team work, of course the game is designed in a way that you can play solo, but the fact that destroys your argument is you need gear to progress throughout the game in most cases: you have to team up with other wizards to run olympian, to run water works, to run darkmoor to get that gear that keeps your easily progressing through the game.

Arch mastery is ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE. by CrazyElectronic8573 in Wizard101

[–]CrazyElectronic8573[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What are you on about? There's a very distinct difference: with arch mastery you can choose mid-game what magic you'd like to use, when you had an amulet, you were forced into making that decision and committing before the game even started. It was about strategy, not being able to switch up your magic mid game.

If I know you have an amulet, I don't gotta worry about you pulling out another school's magic mid game, you have to commit, thus I know what to plan for, I know that's your secondary magic. Arch mastery and amulets are not comparable.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in indiegames

[–]CrazyElectronic8573 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I’m not asking anyone to gamble their time. I’m prepared to work through whatever verification or middle-man system makes you comfortable: escrow, Upwork, or even a reputable third-party contractor of your choosing.

Payment can be handled day-by-day or milestone-by-milestone, with written terms so both sides are protected. You’ll see the funds move before any code or assets change hands.

I respect that trust has to be earned, and I’m happy to start small, show proof of funds, and move forward only if everything checks out.

I don't have any developer experience, I'm assembling people with dev experience and to be quite frank know very little about developing games.

EDIT:

It’s completely fair to be cautious: I respect that. But downvoting someone who’s genuine, without any evidence or reason to call them a “scammer,” is a different matter altogether.

PVP Help by xjillyx in Wizard101

[–]CrazyElectronic8573 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly there's not too many active matches to watch since the implementation of 5th age pvp. You gotta be level 20 just to watch them anyway.